Obama's Job Package To Top $400 Billion, Republican Talking Points To Hurt Feelings

(Reuters)

In a major speech tonight, President Obama is announcing a jobs and growth package that could top $400 billion, CBS reports. Excerpts of the speech were given to the press, and in addition to signature soaring rhetoric, Obama is outlining specific spending increases and tax cuts that he hopes will, among other things, lead to the hiring of one million unemployed construction workers. According to a copy obtained by CNN, Obama will tell the American people and Congress:

The people of this country work hard to meet their responsibilities. The question tonight is whether we’ll meet ours. The question is whether, in the face of an ongoing national crisis, we can stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy; whether we can restore some of the fairness and security that has defined this nation since our beginning.
I am sending this Congress a plan that you should pass right away. It’s called the American Jobs Act. There should be nothing controversial about this piece of legislation. Everything in here is the kind of proposal that’s been supported by both Democrats and Republicans - including many who sit here tonight. And everything in this bill will be paid for. Everything.

The Washington Post reports that "The president's plan, in large part, will call for continuing current measures to stimulate the economy, including a 2 percentage-point payroll-tax cut and extended unemployment benefits, administration officials say. Obama is also likely to call for an additional tax cut for companies that hire workers. Those measures together could cost about $200 billion next year. Obama is planning to propose $100 billion or more in spending on infrastructure, state and local aid, and programs that target people who have been unemployed for more than six months, according to officials and other people familiar with the deliberations."

The Republicans will not offer a formal rebuttal following the speech, but they have distributed talking points. If you're a Republican and a reporter asks you a general question, go with: "President Obama has made a bad economy worse. This fundamental fact will headline the 2012 election. Instead of hope and change, President Obama has given the American people the longest economic downturn since the Great Depression." And if you're asked if Obama can still shred a speech like he used to back in the glory days, just tell them, "The once rock star figure of the Democrat party is now an alarming political liability for House Democrats." Don't worry if it's not true—jittery Democrats will take your word for it and beg Hillary to run again.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By John Del Signore in News on September 8, 2011 6:36 PM

Comments [rss]

ziddysschi

Obama is looking for votes from the unions, he mentions, construction workers and teachers. Like this group needs any more of our tax dollars.

new_q_ler

The jobs plan Obama proposed is pretty bad, and won't do much to stymie unemployment.

Here's what the plan includes...
First off, half the plan is tax cuts, which even for the middle class, have been proven over and over again that they are extremely ineffective in "stimulating" the economy, let alone increasing employment.

Infrastructure projects and aid to municipalities and states to hire/train teachers and other government employees. This is good to increase short term employment via construction jobs for infrastructure projects, and hiring more teachers will increase employment a little as well. However, the amount of jobs those will create, especially over the long-term as states will continue having budget deficits and will continue to slash education funds (aka fire teachers), will only act as a small band-aid on multiple shotgun wounds.

Extended unemployment insurance and similar programs. This is good spending, though will not do too much to increase employment, just stymie off poverty and increase consumer spending by a tiny fraction.

Here's how its financed...
1) tax cuts from Social Security payroll tax holiday. This takes money directly out of the Social Security Trust Fund, thus we are slowly bankrupting it. Not a very liberal or Democratic proposal.

2) Obama has asked the Super Committee to completely pay for this proposal by looking for spending cuts in Medicare and the Military. Because of GOP hostility, there will not be significant cuts to military spending on the likes of $100-$200 billion per year, thus most of the cuts are going to come from Medicare, Medicaid, and other social safety net programs (i.e. Obama cut the budget for heating assistance to the poor last year).

Conclusion:
Thus we are paying for ill-advised tax cuts, some infrastructure spending (short term jobs), teachers/government jobs (stop-gap jobs, but future cuts are expected), social welfare programs (good for people who need immediate assistance for rent/mortgage, food, health, car, etc...but does little to create jobs)...all of which is financed on cuts to other social welfare programs that will create more poverty.

Thus, his proposal = FAIL.

Daniel

I only wish Hillary would challenge Obama to a primary, and I voted for him in 08....

new_q_ler

Hillary is also a corporatist like Obama. You won't be getting anything different in terms of policy.

When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you always lose.

LazyNanny

Nice, another gazillion dollar give away to the already bloated public sector unions.
We are so EFFED.

bggb

You know what our economy needs? more people out of work, not spending discretionary income on consumer products and defaulting on their mortgages.

Also, less taxes for the wealthiest 1%!

It's never worked before but I swear it will work this time!

BottomlessChips

Americans spending past their gills didn't really work either.

How about an honest monetary policy?

Mordicai

I wanted Obama to come out & say "Give me the same deal you gave the last guy: a trillion dollars to blow on my pet project. His was Iraq. Mine will be America. If I can't hit a home run with that, you guys ought to have the next election all sewn up, & giving the way we are hemorrhaging money, a trillion ought to look like a song."

This sounds pretty okay, but like most of this administration, I am dubious.

BottomlessChips

Iraq was the pet project of many. Clinton showed a want to get Saddam out too

bggb

wanting and doing are two different things.

BottomlessChips

I'd call NFZs and bombing Baghdad acts of war...

new_q_ler

you are correct

bggb

Yes, but I wouldn't call them $1T blank checks as was the original point.

BottomlessChips

The same blank checks that the President, VP, and Secretary of State kept signing when they were in Congress?

Again, Iraq, whether it was for safety/terrorism, or removing Saddam (human rights) was the pet project of many.

bggb

If only Republicans were as willing to spend a $1T on the American people as they were on the Iraq War.

BottomlessChips

If only we stop spending trillions on wars and welfare when we already owe $14,700,000,000,000.

bggb

Social safety nets are needed.

Wars of choice are not.

Mordicai

Hey, I'm not saying Saddam wasn't a bastard; I'm also not criticising GHWB's Iraq attacks. You want to get in, hit hard, & get out? Fine. Or well-- I mean, economically fine; I might have policy quibbles but it is a horse of a different colour from what Bush Jr. did-- get us involved in the proverbial "quagmire," costing tons of money, tons of lives, on trumped up justifications, destabilizing a region...WHILE WE ARE ALREADY IN ONE WAR? Yeah, no. The Iraq War is a whole 'nothing thing than some no-fly zones.

zombiebob

that would have been awesome

soothsayer

Congress' tepid response to

Obama's, "America should be in the race to the top! andI believe we can win that race."

meh, we are soooo fucked.